although if they had then a being yet they made no Figure in the World He fully tells us that the Arians appealed for tryal to the Fathers that they were condemned at Nice by a Party and by the Artifice of the Emperor Where he also gives us a monstrous Account of the Number of the Bishops there assembled And p. 99. he affirms that the Arians had not Freedome to dispute their Cause He represents the Arian Councils of Ariminum very Erroneously He manifests his Malignity when he accuses the Trinitarians of Ignorance and for Proof cites a Canon of the Church and p. 103. he gives many Instances of the same where we have proved that there is no such Canon as far as a Negative is capable of being proved And we have discovered his disingenuity in not mentioning Du Ranckin from whom he borrowed all his Materials word for word The seventh Section is of the Immortality of the soul and of the Original of the Jews In this Section the necessity of revealed Religion is proved from the insufficiency of Philosophical Reasons to this purpose As also with relation to a future State Which as Mr. Blount confesses p. 118. hath so much ruffled and entangled mens Minds The principal philosophic Reason is examined and refell'd From whence it will be evident that the Scriptures alone give a satisfactory Account of those things Sir Henry Savil's translating Tacitus and omiting the Original of the Jews is here defended Institution of Divine Worship proved to be before Moses and Abraham As also that Moses and the Israelites did not learn Circumcision from the Aegyptians and that our Author in this Method followed Celsus and Julian The eighth Section of marrying two Sisters Judaism Christianity Millenaries In which the Scriptures brought to prove it unlawful are defended The Nature of Penal Laws in this case makes more against our Deists then for him his Error proceeds from neglecting the Hebrew and following the Greek Translation The Apostolic Canon in this case considered Dr. Hammond's Mistake discovered about a Woman's leaving her Husband and marrying again As also Mr. Blount's Abuse of the Council of Eliberis where we are necessitated to speak on something concerning Excommunication the Churches great Censure Grotius his Error in his Inference from the Apostolic Canon reproved and his Collection from the Council of Eliberis proved unwarrantable St. Basil's Epistle to Diadorus in this case is considered Mr. Blount's great Falshood and Abuse of the civil Law in this case is laid open the Sects of the Jews and the case of the Messiah is rightly stated Mr. Blount's manner of Arguing is reprehended We have defended the Prophecy of Daniel in this case and have shown the Original of the Millinaries The ninth Section of Augury Origine of Good and Evil plurality of Worlds Ocellus Lucanus c. From his account of Augury I have collected the Necessity of revealed Religion discovered his mistake of Christian Processions If what Varenius concerning whole Nations being Atheistical affirms be true the most learned Dr. Stilling fleet seems to be under some mistake Varenius his Assertion argues the Necessity of revealed Religion the Chinensian and Aegyptian account of time proved to be vain and ridiculous as also the Chaldean the main Props of our Author's Hypothesis the Origine of Good and Evil not to be known by natural Religion If Mr. Blount's Supposition be granted concerning the Persians the Deist must be an Idolater his reason for plurality of worlds refuted the principal Arguments of Ocellus Lucanus refell'd his Age examined with some uncommon Observations relating to him and our Author 's great Vanity in making him cotemporary with or ancienter then Moses exposed Mr. Blount's great Argument for a double Creation out of the first and second Chapters of Genesis enquired into and proved ineffectual From hence we may see the reason why in his 5th Page he propounds it as a Difficulty how distinct pieces of the World should be Peopled as America and the like without a miracle and of Mathusalem's being the longest llv'd of all Adam's Posterity because in his Hypothesis of two distinct Originals of mankind they have an easie Solution although they have a truer and a much easier one in ours This method of his is indeed allowable in Philosophy which varies according to every new Phaenomenon but hath no place in matters of Religion His Disingenuity in relation to Cicero reproved the Difference between Ocellus and the Chaldeans is observed There are many other Matters contained in this Book which for Brevities sake I have omited but are perspicuously treated of and I hope to the Readers satisfaction Two things remain which I think fit to acquaint my Reader with one is that these Oracles are many of them transcribed out of modern Authors of whom I have taken no Notice but require all at Mr. Blount's Hands he being the Person that gave them the Title of Oracles neither take I any Notice of others concerned he being the chief Architect The other is that these Controversies depending much on Authority I am necessitated to make frequent appeals to Greek and Latin Authors whom for the Benefit of some Readers I have translated into English where if I have not kept my self strictly to the Words yet I have taken all care not to deviate from tne true sense Lastly As in all Duty bound I humbly submit the censure of what I have written to my Superiors in the Cnurch of England Farewel Mr. BLOUNT's Oracles of Reason Examined and Answered In Nine SECTIONS c. SECT I. Of the Mosaic Creation and the Divine Miracles MR. Blount Page the Second says That many Fathers of the Church have concluded that the whole Mosaic Creation seems to have been but a pious Allegory ANSWER It is worth observing that although the Author of these pretended Oracles of Reason hath little regard for the Holy Scriptures and without all peradventure less for the Fathers of the Church yet upon all Occasions he makes use of their Authorities and frequently quotes them Upon reading this Imputation and his fastning such a Charge upon many Fathers of the Church I forthwith consulted Mr. Dally of the Use of the Fathers Book the second Chapter three and fourth where he treats professedly of the Fathers Errors and I find nothing there that favours this bold Assertion On the contrary I find an Expression of Dally's from the unanimous Consent of the Fathers which if it be true this of the Oracle must necessarily be false None of the ancient Fathers can be charged with this Mistake if Origen his Interpreters I take not into the Number and perhaps St. Ambrose be excepted St. Ambrose Chap. 2. of Paradise speaks not of above One that was of this Opinion and the Margent refers us to Origen Whereas had it been true what these Oracles suggests p. 49. That in the first Ages of the Christian Church the more candid Interpreters deviated from the literal reading of Moses's History
less than two hundred Dissenters and not three only as Mr. Blount bears us in hand that held the contrary As to what is added concerning the Persecutions used by the Arians we own it to be true and the Orthodox frequently inveighed against the Arians for these their Barbarities I shall therefore acquaint my Reader what Grotius says lib 2. De Jur. Pacis Belli cap. 21. sect 5. Athanasius is very vehement against the Arian Heresy for in his Epist ad Solit. they were the first who made use of the Temporal Power to punish dissenters with Stripes Imprisonments Confiscations and Banishments says Mr. Blount Those Bishops were condemned in France by the judgment of the Church which persecuted the Priscillianists to death and in the East that Synod was condemned which consented to the Burning of Bogomilus Page 100. As for the Trinitarians of those times I must confess that I cannot but esteem them as enemies to all Humane Learning for they had Canons forbidding them to read any Ethnick Books ANSWER I have seldom found such Confidence any where as these Oracles do in all places afford us How ridiculous this insulting of Mr. Blount's is will fully appear in handling this Point In prosecution of which I shall First Lay down the Discourse of Father Paul relating hereunto Secondly I shall show what Reasons I have to dissent from that learned and worthy Person Thirdly I shall consult the Opinions of some of the most Learned of the Eastern Church with my Reason for so doing Lastly I shall make plain Inferences which will be sufficient to cramp the Presumption of our Deist and to defend the Trinitarians as he calls them against the Imputation of Ignorance Of what Candor and Learning Father Paul was every Man knows that hath read his History of the Council of Trent where p. 472. he hath this Discourse In the Church of Martyrs there was no Ecclesiastical Prohibition though some godly Men made Conscience of reading bad Books for fear of offending against one of the three Points of the Law of God to avoid the Contagion of Evil not to expose ones self to Temptations without Necessity or Profit and not to spend time vainly These Laws being Natural do remain always and should oblige us to beware of reading bad Books though there were no Ecclesiastical Law for it But these Respects ceasing the Example of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria a famous Doctor did happen who about the Year of our Lord 240. being reprehended by some of his Priests for these Causes and troubled with these Respects had a Vision that he should read all Books because he was able to judge of them yet they thought that there was greater Danger in the Books of the Gentiles than of the Hereticks the reading whereof was more abhorred and reprehended because it was more used by Christian Doctors for a vanity of Human Eloquence For this cause St. Jerom either in a Version or in a Sleep was beaten by the Devil So that about the Year 400 a Council in Carthage did forbid to read the Books of the Gentiles but allowed them to read the Books of Hereticks the Decrees whereof is among the Canons collected by Gratian and this was the first Ecclesiastical Prohibition by way of Canon Thus far Paul And now I come to the second thing The Council of Carthage which Father Paul relates to is that which is commonly called the 4th Carthaginian Council whose 16th Canon is ut Episcopus Gentilium libâ—os non legat Haereticorum autem pro necessitate tempore That a Bishop do not read the Books of the Gentiles but in reading the Books of Hereticks He is to have regard to Necessity and Opportunity Now in this particular I dissent from Paul and joyn with that great Antiquary Justellus who in his Preface to the Code of the African Church says Concilium quod vocant quartum Carthaginense plane repudiandum est nec fides adhibenda Canonibus 104 quos sine auctoritate huic Concilio adscribunt The Council which is commonly called the fourth Carthaginian is to be wholly rejected neither is there any Faith to be given to the 104 Canons which without any good Authority they ascribe to it There is no mention of these Canons in the Collection of Ferrandus nor in that of Dionysius Exiguus nor in the Code of the African Church nor in the Collection commonly called the Afr. Council In a Manuscript that belonged to Cardinal Barberini they are entituled Ancient Statutes of the Eastern Church But these Canons themselves prove the contrary The Ceremonies of the Ordination of the lesser Orders as they are sate forth in this Council are agreeable enough to the Practice of the Western Church where these Orders were conferred by delivering holy Vessels but not to the Eastern Church where these Orders were always conferred by Imposition of Hands In other Manuscripts they are entituled The ancient Statutes of the Church In a word there can be no sufficient reason given why they should not be found in the ancient Collections if they were genuine The ancientest Author Father Paul cites is Gratian whose testimony is of no weight if not strengthen'd by some collateral Evidence For all know He is a perfect Rhapsodist and this is so fully made out by August Tarraconensis in his Book de Emendat Gratiani that there is not any place left for the least doubt Which prejudice together with that of Moderness may be objected against Isidore Burchardus Hincmare Ivo Carnotensis c. and the defence which Schelstrate makes is so weak and dull as that it savours little of a Vaticane Library keeper whereas otherwise in his Ecclesia Africana He discovers much Learning and Reading I am now to consult the Opinions of some in the Eastern Church and to bring my reason for doing so Saint Basil in the first Tome of his Works hath a Homily whose Title is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Homily was compos'd for young Men not to prohibite them to read the Books of the Gentiles but to direct them and to shew what benefit they might reap thereby Amongst other things He takes notice that Moses was educated in the Learning of the Egyptians and so proceeded to the knowledge of the true God In like manner in following ages Dauiel at Babylon learned the Learning of the Chaldeans and from thence proceeded to Divine Doctrines Gregory Nazianzen ad Seleucum Iambie 3. treats of this matter where he prohibits nothing as touching reading the Books of the Gentiles but only lays down this Rule That from the same Plant Roses may be gathered and Thorns and that we ought to take one and leave the other The reason of these two citations is to stop the mouths of those who pretend that the Apostles prohibited the reading the Books of the Gentiles and for that purpose quote chap. 5. of the Apostolical Constitutions whose Title is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning reading the Books of such as are
He quotes Acts 24 ver 19. who ought to have been before thee and object if they had ought against me or else let these same here say if they have found any evil doing in me whilst I stood before the Council And he quotes the 25. About whom when I was at Jerusalem the chief Priests and the Elders of the Jews informed me desiring to have judgment against him to whom I answered It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him Can it now be possibly conceived that Athanasius should thus expose himself and the Sacred Synod as He must of necessity have done if either He or they had been obnoxious to the same charge Sozomen lib. 1. c. 15. Eccles Histor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the Bishops were assembled together they sent for Arius and proposed his Opinion to be disputed and discussed Socrates lib. 1. c. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Opinion of Arius was defended by Eusebius Bishop of Nicomede by Theagnis Bishop of Nice by Maris Bishop of Chalcedon in Bithynia who were opposed with great zeal by Athanasius a Deacon of the Church of Alexandria Theodoret lib. 1. c. 7. I have formerly made mention of some who in the Council defended the cause of Arius besides those Menophantus of Ephesus Patrophilus of Scythopolis Theognis of Nice Narcissus of Neroniad this Neroniad is a City of the other Cilicia now called Irenopolis ' Theonas of Marmarita Secundus of Ptolemais a City of Egypt opposed the Catholiek Faith and took on them the Defense and Patronage of Arius Ruffinus lib 1. c. 2. For many days there was a great dispute in the Council where some vehemently favoured Arius and contended for his Doctrines Who can now believe after such a cloud of of Witnesses that there should be the least Mite of truth in this Position of Mr. Blount's That the Arians had not the freedom to dispute their cause at the Council of Nice What should occasion this grand Mistake in our Deist may without great difficulty be conjectured I do not find any ground for it in the Arabian Historians before mentioned but in that impudent Writer Sandius pag 167. I find the whole charge For there He affirms That Arius and his Complices were censured judged and condemned causa inaudita multo minus rationibus expensis They were condemned says He without being heard much less had they permission to produce their Arguments and Reasons And that which overcomes all Impudence is that the said Sandius for proof cites Socrates Theodoret and Athanasius himself whereas there is nothing in those Authors but makes against Him for the places I have cited I have viewed in the Original Upon the whole this plainly appears that Arius was cited before the Fathers in the Council His Propositions were debated His cause was espoused by some in the Council with much zeal every thing on either side was weighed with great deliberation that nothing might be rashly concluded in so weighty and important an Affair Pag. 99. The Arian Doctrine was not only confirmed by eight Councils several times assembled at Tyre Sardis Syrmium Millain Seleucia Nice Tarsis and particularly at Ariminum where six hundred Bishops were of their opinion with only three which held the contrary they also punished others who were of a contrary opinion with Confiscations Banishments and other grievous Punishments ANSWER The Arian Doctrine according to Athanasius was confirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Arian Doctrine was confirmed by ten Synods and more Neither is this any wonder for the Arians had for a long time the Sun-shine of the Secular Power The Question then is not of the Number of Synods but of the Methods by which they did proceed As to the Arian Methods we have this account from Athanasius All their Councils were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All the Methods they took were irregular they were grounded on Hatred Ambition and Violence and this made their Councils void to all intents and purposes And as to the Council of Ariminum He says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Things were there determined by ambition and violence Nay He is so positive as to this of Ariminum that he plainly says That the Advocates thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That if the Advocates of that Council did but know how irregular the Proceedings at Ariminum were they would be silent and not plead for it So charitable was this good Man that altho' the Arians persecuted Him causelesly with all imaginable malice and wickedness yet He could not think that they would proceed to such boldness as openly to defend such notoriously unjustifiable courses As to the Number of Bishops pretended to be present at the Council of Ariminum there is some difference between our Author and Sandius the latter making the Number to be a thousand or more Interea qui Arimini convenerunt Pontifices numero millenarium excedente fuerunt And this Hunerick testifies in Victor Vticen lib. 3. I have consulted the place and can avouch for Sandius that he hath rightly cited Victor Utic For thus it is in the Bibliotheck of the Fathers But the Authority of Hunerick is of no moment He was an Arian Prince a Vandal and one who to carry on designs would not confine himself to numbers and peradventure the consideration thereof might move Mr. Blount to make allowance and to confine Himself to six hundred a very competent number and more than I am willing to acknowledge For I cannot but think that they are both out of the way since Sulpitius Severus an ancient Author and one that had many conveniences of knowing the truth much better than either of them assures us that there were very few above four hundred Quadringenti aliquot amplius are the words of Sulpitius Severus lib. 2. Hist Sacra And whereas Mr. Blount says That out of the number of six hundred there were only three that dissented he is under a great mistake and to make it very plain I shall cite Theodoret lib. 2. Eccles Hist cap. 23. where we find what here follows The Great Athanasius in his Epistle to the Africans writes after this manner of the Council of Ariminum Who can bear with them who prefer the Council of Ariminum before that of Nice or rather who cannot but hate such as reject the Decrees of those at Nice and are in love with such as were extorted by force and violence at Ariminum It happens to such as it happened to the Jews accordingly as it is written by the Prophet They have forsaken the fountain of living waters and have digged to themselves broken cisterns that cannot hold water So these Men leaving the Sacred Nicene Council have betaken themselves to many Synods which are in themselves vain and of no effect And yet at Ariminum there were no
Geography of Carolus a Sancto Paulo would give little Credit to this Charge for he would not find half that number of Bishopricks in the Christian World We confess there is some difference among ancient Authors as to the precise Number of Bishops in the Nicene Synod but then the difference is very inconsiderable not so portentous and extravagant as it is here represented nor a Word of this pretended Project of Constantine's Athanasius Hilary Hierom Ruffin Socrates and others affirm the Number of the Council to be 318. 'T is true there were many Presbyters and Deacons that accompanied these Bishops of whom these Authors make no particular mention there being no such regard had of them as there was of the Bishops I am verily perswaded that what Mr. Selden says in his Commentary on Eutychius p. 81. will obtain Belief among all unprejudiced Persons I will therefore report in his own Words Nemo mihi Sancto Athanasio aequiparandus is scilicet Archidiaconus tunc Ecclesiae Alexandrinae cum Alexandro patriarcha suo cui proxime successit testis interfuit oculatus Atque diserte is in Epistola ad Episcopos Africanos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No one in my Opinion as to this Matter is to be compared to Athanasius he was Archdeacon of the Church of Alexandria an Eye Witness and immediate Successor to Alexander the Patriarch and he expresly writes in an Epistle of his to the African Bishops That in the Synod held at Nice there were assembled Three hundred and eighteen Bishops There is an ancient Author who wrote a Book about the time of the fourth general Council held at Chalcedon One hundred and twenty Years after that at Nice The Title of the Book is An Exposition and Collection of all the said Synods This Book was brought into England in Manuscript together with many other Manuscripts of great Value by Christian Ravius a German a Man very well versed in the Oriental Learning This Book gives us an account much differing from Mr. Blount's He says There were 232 Bishops in the Council Presbyters and Monks 86 in all 318. Here is no mention of 2000 Bishops nor of any Artifice of Constantine's And this is the more to be regarded if it be true what Sandius the Arian Historiographer imagines p 166. that the Author of this Collection was Sabinus the Macedonian who wrote a Book of the same Title Socrates assures us that this History was written with great Partiality being an Enemy to that Council and one that accused the Fathers thereof as simple and ignorant Persons for which he is reproved by the same Socrates lib. 1. c. 6. and lib. 2. c. 13. How glad would Sabinus have been to have laid hold on this occasion to blacken Constantine and this Synod had there been the least Colour of Truth for so horrid a Calumny Perhaps some may think that Mr. Blount had somd good Grounds for laying this Imputation on Constantine and the Council although he did not produce them and would therefore be willingly satisfied what Conjectures may be made in order thereunto For the satisfaction of such I make this Answer That I believe Mr. Blount had no Grounds but such only as we find cited in Sandius and Selden In the first we find out of Hottinger in his Oriental History viz. That Petricides and Elma Cinus Arabian Writers have delivered to Posterity that there were at Nice 2300 which in truth can make nothing for Mr. Blount the Question was of Bishops only not of Others For Socrates lib. 1. c. 5. Eccles Hist says that there were at this Council Presbyters Deacons and of other inferior Orders innumerable And I find this of Socrates to be very agreeable with that which is delivered by other Historians of that Age and which peradventure might give the first occasion of this exorbitant number of Bishops And if we may be allowed to consult Reason in historical Matters I cannot do better then to cite Nicetas Coniates lib. 5. c. 9. where he gives this Reason why no more Bishops met in so venerable an Assembly because Age and Sickness detained many and that Bishopricks were then thin sowed every little City being not then advanced into an Episcopal See In Selden we find Eutychius affirming that in the City of Nice were assembled 2400 Bishops According to Dr. Pocock's Translation Josephus Aegyptius affirms the number to be 2048. And the same is affirmed by Ismael Ibn Ali the Mahometan Historian These are the only Authors that I have any where observed to have been made use of by learned Men to this purpose To all which the Novelty of the Author is a sufficient Answer Certainly those Historians who liv'd in the Age when things are transacted and are Eye-witnesses and are a great part of the Affairs themselves are to be believed before others that lived some hundred of Years after the things were done But since Ismael Ibn Ali the Mahometan seems more full to Mr. Blount's purpose than the others I will here translate him About the End of the twentieth Year of Constantine the Emperor there were gathered together in Council 2048 Bishops then the Emperor chose out of that number 318. And they did Excommunicate Arius of Alexandria because he did assert that Christ was a Creature The foresaid Bishops were consenting to the Emperor's Pleasure and so they innovated and published a New System of Christian Religion Eusebius who lived in those Days and was a Member of the Council says in his Chronicle that the Vicennalia of Constantine were Celebrated at Rome Anno 330. and that the Council was assembled Anno 325. So that this Trip of the Mahometans is an Argument that he made use of bad Records in compiling his History And whereas he says the Council innovated as to Religion he writes like a Mahometan indeed and not like a Man acquainted with the Misteries of our Sacred Religion We have therefore reason to believe that as the Arabic Canons falsly fathered on this Council are exploded by all that have any Gust of Criticism so likewise will these Modern Arabic Pamphlets be rejected by all such as will take the Pains to examine them Pag. 99. The Arians had not the Freedom to dispute their Cause in the Council of Nice ANSWER If this could be made appear then farewell to the Authority of the Nicene Council but if this be false as undoubtedly it is what a horrid injury is done to this most Venerable Assembly This is one of the greatest Objections the Protestants have against the Council of Trent and that the Catholicks of old had against the Arian Synods but who can believe this that knows with what fervency and zeal Saint Athanasius declaims against this perverse Method And this Method He says is repugnant to the Law of God and the Blessed Apostle Athanasius Apol. ad Const Imper. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The divine Law and the Blessed Apostle require and Command all parties to be heard And to this purpose